The last thing the country needs is MORE LAWYERS. We need more doctors, engineers, computer scientists.

7:08 pm August 23, 2013

Obama666 wrote:

Barry O'Useless, opining on the important issues of the day.

7:10 pm August 23, 2013

Anonymous wrote:

Amen!!!!,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,we should stop producing lawyers for at least 10 years.

7:45 pm August 23, 2013

Phenry wrote:

When will this fool stop campaigning?

8:24 pm August 23, 2013

Ralph wrote:

Why not go one step more and issue law degrees based on the whim of a politician. Medical degrees especially for those who treat the powerful would also be two years attendance with no final exam.

10:43 pm August 23, 2013

Joe wrote:

In a free market economy, supply and demand determines prices. It seems that if new lawyers are saddled with high debt compared to wages that maybe there are either a) too many lawyers, thus driving down the wages or b) too few schools driving up the cost of the degree.

But why single out law school. To sit for a CPA requires a 5 year degree. Think how much med students would save with a three year program! The length of education should be determined by what is necessary to learn to be effective in that field. If schools are charging too much, address that issue, but shortening the required education seems more likely to create a bunch of inept lawyers than anything else.

11:04 pm August 23, 2013

@obama666 wrote:

Think much? Nah.

Complain much? Yeah.

11:42 am August 24, 2013

harold lloyd wrote:

The trend is toward turning education into nothing more than job training academies, not to educate them enough to be responsible citizens that vote wisely, or lead efficient or satisfying lives.
Why is that?

11:48 am August 24, 2013

harold wrote:

Why are we creating a proletariat, a class of people whose only value to society is the work they do?

What about creating good citizens who can vote rationally, and lead efficient lives?

1:03 pm August 24, 2013

Adriana wrote:

1) Everyone calm down - he is allowed to have his opinions, so long as he doesn't start throwing federal subsidies behind it... although with his track record, it isn't guaranteed that he wouldn't do something like that.

2) What this article doesn't mention is that in addition to shortening law school from three years to two, schools are also considering changing the curriculum entirely from socratic methods of teaching to what I have heard my professors call the "business school model," meaning that they teach the students "practical" skills. The problem with this is that the purpose of law school is not chiefly to teach you how to file paper work/argue in a courtroom. Those are things historically taught once you are a practicing lawyer because every law firm does things differently. The purpose of law school is to teach you to THINK like a lawyer - meaning to instill in you critical thinking skills different from what any other graduate or professional degree will give you. So to shorten law school, if it also comes with a change in curriculum, we are doing a disservice to our future lawyers.

For those of you not convinced that the socratic method is a valuable classroom tool, pause and take note of the fact that a law degree is one of the only graduate/professional degrees that does not lock you into a field of work afterwards. If you go to graduate school for political science, you are most likely going to end up a professor - if you go to medical school, you are going to be some form of practicing doctor. With a law degree, you never actually have to be a practicing lawyer. The value of the degree comes from teaching students to think differently - to become critical analysts who can apply their skills in any number of fields, such as business, government, policy, whatever. So to focus law school into just the practical aspects of law, you're only going to create greater strain on an already impacted job market... and yes, you will have a future of inept lawyers who will not be able to adequately represent their clients.

9:20 pm August 25, 2013

They could have been Obama's sons wrote:

The 2 blacks who beat an 88 year old WWII Okinawa veteran to death could have been Obama's sons. The 3 blacks who killed a Canadian baseball player because those blacks were bored could have been Obama's sons. He is in his second term. He does not need to pander to half of his DNA. It is time for him to be honest, the way he was in 2007 talking about the way black fathers desert their families... which infuriated Jesse Jackson...but there is alot of truth to it

10:58 pm August 25, 2013

Max wrote:

Inevitable effect of information age.

10:08 pm August 26, 2013

Ted Harvatin wrote:

Obama never practice law a day in his life. And he can't string together two sentences with saying "uh" unless he is reading from a teleprmpter. How did he get into Harvard? Obviously his under grad grades were inferior and that's why he wont' release them. Affirmative action admittance. Law Review editor? We know he's good at slashing and burning opponents. What did the Law Review accomplish during his tenure. Zip. What were his ratings as a U of Chi instructor? Bottom third. Did zero in the state and US Senate and horrible as president. The guy is a charlatan in all respects.

10:11 pm August 26, 2013

Ted Harvatin wrote:

Never practiced law. Got into harvard on affirmative action. elected law review, well, you see how he plays dirty to win elections. Undistinguished record at Harvard. Mediocre ratings as a U of Chi instructor. Terrible senator, horrible president. Guy is a charlatan in all respects.

6:04 pm September 4, 2013

Anonymous wrote:

Is this the same Ted Harvatin who has dedicated his life to helping drunk drivers get their licenses back?

Add a Comment

Error message

Name

We welcome thoughtful comments from readers. Please comply with our guidelines. Our blogs do not require the use of your real name.

About Law Blog

The Law Blog covers the legal arena’s hot cases, emerging trends and big personalities. It’s brought to you by lead writer Jacob Gershman with contributions from across The Wall Street Journal’s staff. Jacob comes here after more than half a decade covering the bare-knuckle politics of New York State. His inside-the-room reporting left him steeped in legal and regulatory issues that continue to grab headlines.

A federal judge in Manhattan rejected a bid by the conservative advocacy group Citizens United to stop New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman from requiring that charities disclose to him their major donors.

Concerns about a gender gap in the legal profession tend to focus on issues like pay, billing rates and who makes partner. A new study by the American Bar Association looks inside the federal courtroom to see who's trying cases.